Re: Re: Removing SSL renegotiation (Was: Should we back-patch SSL renegotiation fixes?)

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Re: Removing SSL renegotiation (Was: Should we back-patch SSL renegotiation fixes?)
Date: 2015-07-28 17:00:01
Message-ID: 20150728170001.GC4726@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2015-07-28 18:59:02 +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
> Attached are:
>
> a) a slightly evolved version of Michael's patch disabling renegotiation
> by default that I'm planning to apply to 9.4 - 9.0
>
> b) a patch removing renegotiation entirely from master and 9.5
>
> Unless somebody protests soon I'm going to push something like that
> after having dinner.
>
> I am wondering whether b) ought to remove Port->count, but I'm currently
> leaning to leaving it in place for now; perhaps adding a comment in the
> struct. I'm actually thinking we very well might want to add something
> like it to all backends, but more importantly it'd make the diff larger
> with mostly unrelated changes.

And really attached.

Attachment Content-Type Size
94-and-older.patch text/x-patch 3.6 KB
master-and-95.patch text/x-patch 9.5 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2015-07-28 17:04:45 Re: Sharing aggregate states between different aggregate functions
Previous Message Andres Freund 2015-07-28 16:59:02 Re: Re: Removing SSL renegotiation (Was: Should we back-patch SSL renegotiation fixes?)